External evaluator

- WMS Gaming, Inc

An external evaluator can evaluate the wagering game outcome data against rules and/or criteria that lead to an exciting and entertaining event separate and/or distinct from the wagering game itself. An external evaluator evaluates game outcome data, received from a wagering gaming machine via a network, against criteria for a plurality of events (203). It is determined that the game outcome data satisfies a criterion of a first of the plurality of events. The criteria comprise the criterion. A device is determined that performs an operation that, at least partially, implements the first of the plurality of events (323). A communication that indicates the first of the plurality of events is transmitted to the device via the network (327).

Skip to: Description  ·  Claims  ·  References Cited  · Patent History  ·  Patent History
Description
RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims the priority benefit of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/249,822 filed Oct. 8, 2009.

LIMITED COPYRIGHT WAIVER

A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material which is subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent files or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights whatsoever. Copyright 2010, WMS Gaming, Inc.

FIELD

Embodiments of the inventive subject matter relate generally to wagering game systems.

BACKGROUND

Wagering game machines, such as slot machines, video poker machines and the like, have been a cornerstone of the gaming industry for several years. Generally, the popularity of such machines depends on the likelihood (or perceived likelihood) of winning money at the machine and the intrinsic entertainment value of the machine relative to other available gaming options. Where the available gaming options include a number of competing wagering game machines and the expectation of winning at each machine is roughly the same (or believed to be the same), players are likely to be attracted to the most entertaining and exciting machines.

Shrewd operators consequently strive to employ the most entertaining and exciting machines, features, and enhancements available because such machines attract frequent play and hence increase profitability to the operator. Therefore, there is a continuing need for wagering game machine manufacturers to continuously develop new games and gaming enhancements that will attract frequent play.

SUMMARY

In some embodiments, a method comprises evaluating game outcome data, received from a wagering gaming machine via a network, against criteria for a plurality of events. It is determined that the game outcome data satisfies a criterion of a first of the plurality of events. The criteria comprise the criterion. A device that performs an operation that, at least partially, implements the first of the plurality of events is determined. A communication that indicates the first of the plurality of events is transmitted to the device, via the network.

In some embodiments, a method comprises evaluating wagering game outcome data against a shadow pay table. The wagering game outcome data was communicated, via a network, from an electronic wagering game machine that hosts an instance of a wagering game from which the wagering game outcome data was generated. A first result is determined based, at least in part, on said evaluating the wagering game outcome data against the shadow pay table. A second result is audited based on the first result. The second result is determined from a pay table of the instance of the wagering game that corresponds to the shadow pay table.

In some embodiments, a method comprises evaluating wagering game outcome data against a first pay table. The wagering game outcome data was communicated, via a network, from an electronic wagering game machine that hosts an instance of a wagering game from which the wagering game outcome data was generated. The first pay table differs from a second pay table that is for the instance of the wagering game. An award is determined based, at least in part, on said evaluating the wagering game outcome data against the first pay table. The award is communicated to machine that performs an operation to supply the award.

In some embodiments, a method comprises evaluating game outcome data indicated in a plurality of communications, received from a plurality of wagering game machines via a network, until an aggregate of the game outcome data satisfies a criterion for an event. A device that handles the event is determined. A communication that indicates an operation that implements, at least partially, the event is transmitted to the device.

In some embodiments, an apparatus comprises a processor and memory. The apparatus also comprises means for evaluating wagering game outcome data against an event criterion separate from a wagering game machine that generated the wagering game outcome data. The evaluating means also generates an output of the evaluating. The apparatus also comprises means for communicating whether an operation to implement an event should be performed based on the output of the evaluating means.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES

Embodiments of the invention are illustrated in the Figures of the accompanying drawings in which:

FIG. 1 depicts a conceptual diagram of an example system with an external evaluator evaluating wagering game outcome data.

FIGS. 2-4 depict flowcharts of example operations for evaluating wagering game outcome data. FIG. 2 depicts a flowchart of example operations for evaluating wagering game outcome data against a criterion that is distinct from a wagering game that generates the wagering game outcome data. FIG. 3 depicts example operations that continue from the flowchart depicted by FIG. 2. FIG. 4 depicts example operations that continue from FIG. 2.

FIG. 5 depicts an example conceptual diagram normalizing of aggregated wagering game outcome data by an external evaluator.

FIGS. 6-7 depict flowcharts of example operations for evaluating wagering game outcome data from multiple wagering game machines.

FIG. 8 is a block diagram illustrating an example external evaluator architecture.

FIG. 9 is a block diagram illustrating a wagering game network 900, according to example embodiments of the invention.

 DESCRIPTION OF THE EMBODIMENTS

The description that follows includes exemplary systems, methods, techniques, instruction sequences, and computer program products that embody techniques of the present inventive subject matter. However, it is understood that the described embodiments may be practiced without these specific details. For instance, although examples refer to performing operations on backend systems, operations can be performed on handheld devices (e.g., cellular phones). In other instances, well-known instruction instances, protocols, structures, and techniques have not been shown in detail in order not to obfuscate the description.

Introduction

Although wagering games and wagering game machines provide significant entertainment and excitement, outcomes of wagering games can be used to provide entertainment and excitement external to the wagering game machines and even distinct and/or separate from the wagering games that generate the outcomes. A wagering game machine can communicate wagering game outcome data to a machine that is external to the wagering game machine (“external evaluator”) for evaluation of the wagering game outcome data. The external evaluator can evaluate the wagering game outcome data against rules and/or criteria that lead to an exciting and entertaining event separate and/or distinct from the wagering game itself. Evaluating wagering game outcome data separate from the hosting wagering game machine allows a variety of events to be associated with game outcomes and allows for events to adapt to a dynamic environment and/or to player preferences. In addition, an external evaluator allows for additional valuable functionality, including independent verification of wagering game machines.

FIG. 1 depicts a conceptual diagram of an example system with an external evaluator evaluating wagering game outcome data. In the illustration of FIG. 1, a wagering game establishment network comprises a wagering game machine 103 and an external evaluator. A device 107 may also be a part of the wagering game establishment network (e.g., another wagering game machine, a server, a device controller, etc.), or can be an independent device registered with the wagering game establishment (e.g., a cellular phone, a personal data assistant, a handheld computer, etc.). The wagering game machine 103, the external evaluator 105, and the device 107 are communicatively coupled (e.g., wired network, wireless network, a mixed network, etc.). FIG. 1 also depicts a player 101 at the wagering game machine 103. This illustration depicts several example stages to aid in understanding possible operations that can be performed in a system with an external evaluator, although embodiments are not limited to the order and particular operations illustrated.

At a stage A, the wagering game machine 103 communicates wagering game outcome data to the external evaluator 105. Despite the illustration, the wagering game machine 103 may be a portable device. The wagering game outcome data indicates a wagering game and an outcome. Examples of an outcome include symbols resulting from a spin on a slot game, cards dealt in a video poker game, etc. Examples of outcome data include numbers from a random number generator, values that represent particular cards or symbols, a reel value and a symbol value, references to graphical data, vectors, etc. Wagering game outcome data is not limited to indicating the wagering game and outcome. Wagering game outcome data can also indicate a paytable identifier, player account, denomination, wager amount, time of the outcome, etc.

At stage B, the external evaluator 105 evaluates the wagering game outcome data and acts accordingly. The external evaluator 105 has access to a set of rules and/or event criteria. The external evaluator 105 evaluates the wagering game outcome data against the set of rules and/or criteria to determine one or more operations to be performed to implement an event. The set of rules and/or criteria can indicate various aspects of wagering game outcome data (e.g., certain symbols, win amounts, wager amounts, consecutive outcomes, etc.) to be satisfied for an event to occur. The set of rules and/or criteria may also indicate aspects of player data to be satisfied for the event to occur, for multiple events to occur, etc. For example, the set of rules and/or criteria for an event may indicate that an event will be triggered if a player, who has wagered an amount greater than $500 and who is staying within the casino, attains a wagering game outcome of a particular symbol combination. Examples of an event include an environmental effect event (e.g., a particular graphic and audio), entry into a separate wagering game (e.g., entry into a tournament or lottery), a hospitality event (e.g., submission of a drink order), activity in a separate wagering game (e.g., spin of a community funded slot wagering game, determining an outcome of an outcome that includes an overloaded symbol), etc.

If the set of rules and/or criteria are satisfied for an event, then the external evaluator 105 determines one or more machines to perform one or more operations that implement the event. In FIG. 1, the external evaluator 105 determines that a wagering game server (i.e., the device 107) performs the one or more operations.

At stage C, the external evaluator 105 communicates an indication of the wagering game outcome data and/or the operation(s) to implement the event to the device 107. For instance, the external evaluator 105 transmits several data units that indicate a reference to the wagering game outcome data and a value that indicates the event (e.g., an event code). Embodiments can utilize a variety of techniques to communicate an indication of the wagering game outcome data and/or the operation(s) to implement the event (e.g., literally embed the wagering game outcome data in packets, transmit a key for the data and a network address of a store that hosts the data, transmit an event code, transmit a name of an operation, etc.).

At stage D, the device 107 causes the operation(s) that implement the event to be performed.

FIGS. 2-4 depict flowcharts of example operations for evaluating wagering game outcome data. FIG. 2 depicts a flowchart of example operations for evaluating wagering game outcome data against a criterion that is distinct from a wagering game that generates the wagering game outcome data. At block 201, wagering game outcome data is received from a wagering game machine.

At block 203, it is determined if there is an event criterion state structure that corresponds to the wagering game machine. For instance, an external evaluator accesses a table to determine if an event criterion state structure has been instantiated for the wagering game machine that generated the received wagering game outcome data. Events can have criteria satisfied in one instance and can have criteria that can be satisfied over time with multiple outcomes. The event criterion state structure tracks state of satisfaction of event criteria (e.g., a first criterion has been satisfied, but a second has not been satisfied) on a wagering game machine basis. If an event criterion state structure has been instantiated for the wagering game machine, then control flows to block 205. Otherwise, control flows to block 211.

At block 211, it is determined if the wagering game outcome data corresponds to an entry in an event table. For instance, the external evaluator can determine if the wagering game outcome data indicates a game type (e.g., video poker, video slot, etc.) that indexes or keys an entry in the event table. Although the illustration refers to a table, embodiments are not limited to a table structure and can utilize any of a variety of data structures and hardware to associate an event with a criterion or criteria. In addition, multiple events can index into or be associated with a same set of rules and/or criteria. If the wagering game outcome data corresponds to an entry in the event table, then control flows to block 215. If not, then control flows to block 213.

At block 213, the wagering outcome data is discarded. Embodiments are not, however, required to discard the wagering game outcome data. Embodiments can use the wagering game outcome data to update logs, track outcomes, compute statistics, etc.

At block 215, a loop begins for each entry in the event table that corresponds to the wagering game outcome data.

At block 217, it is determined if the corresponding entry indicates more than one criterion. If the corresponding entry indicates more than one criterion, then control flows to block 219. If the corresponding entry does not indicate more than one criterion, then control flows to block 401 of FIG. 4.

FIG. 4 depicts example operations that continue from FIG. 2. At block 401, it is determined if the wagering game outcome data satisfy the criterion indicated in the entry. If the wagering game outcome data do not satisfy the criterion, then control flows to block 215 for the next entry in the event table, if any. If the wagering game outcome data satisfy the criterion, then control flows to block 403. Examples of a criterion include a ratio of wins to losses over a certain number of recent plays, a threshold lifetime wager amount, total time played in a 10 hour period, particular symbols attained in a game, particular games played, number of different games played, new games played, drinks ordered while playing a particular game, etc.

At block 403, a device(s) that performs an operation(s) that implements the event(s) indicated in the entry is determined. For instance, an external evaluator determines that operations to implement a celebration event are performed by an audio controller and a LED display. As another example, the external evaluator determines a network address of a server that implements order submission and account debiting operations to implement a hospitality event.

At block 405, a communication(s) that indicates the operation(s) is generated. The communication is for the device(s) determined to perform the operation(s). As examples, an external evaluator can construct a message with operation codes or name of procedures or functions to be executed by the device(s). An external evaluator can also call a function or procedure that populates a template message with operation codes or API calls, and a network address of the device(s) that will use the operation codes or make the API calls.

At block 407, the communication is transmitted to the device(s). An external evaluator can transmit the communication as a network packet, in an e-mail message, incidental to executing an API function, by passing the communication to a process that handles transmission, etc. Control flows from block 407 to block 215 for processing of the next entry, if any.

Returning to FIG. 2, if the entry indicated more than one criterion, then a criterion state structure is generated for the wagering game machine, and is populated with relevant data of the wagering game outcome data at block 219. Embodiments can populate the structure with all of the wagering game outcome data, a reference to the wagering game outcome data, a reference to a portion of the wagering game outcome data, etc. Embodiments can generate the criterion state structure based on all criteria for an entry, for example, by calling a function aware of the criteria. Embodiments can also create an initial criterion state structure with a record or field for the first encountered criterion, and update the structure as more criterion are encountered. Embodiments can also create the criterion state structure with an index or reference into the corresponding entry of the event table.

Within the loop initiated at block 215 another loop begins at block 221 for each criterion of the entry. For each criterion of the corresponding entry, operations indicated at blocks 301, 303, and 305 of FIG. 3 are performed.

FIG. 3 depicts example operations that continue from the flowchart depicted by FIG. 2. At block 301, it is determined if the criterion state structure satisfies the criterion. If the criterion state structure does not satisfy the criterion, then control flows to block 303. If the criterion state structure satisfies the criterion, then control flows to block 305. For instance, an external evaluator walks through the criterion state structure to determine if data satisfies the criterion. In another example, the external evaluator accesses the criterion state structure in accordance with a schema or map.

At block 303, it is indicated in the event criterion state structure that the criterion is not satisfied. For example, the external evaluator can update a flag that indicates which field in the criterion state structure does not satisfy the criterion. The external evaluator can also update the structure to indicate the criterion is satisfied and when it was satisfied. Control flows from block 303 to block 221 of FIG. 2 for the next criterion of the entry, if any.

At block 305, it is indicated in the event criterion state structure that the criterion is satisfied. For example, the external evaluator can update a flag that indicates which field(s) satisfies the criterion. The external evaluator can also update a global flag or value in addition to or instead of a field flag/value to indicate that the criterion is satisfied. Control flows from block 303 to block 221 of FIG. 2 for the next criterion of the entry, if any.

After the operations indicated at blocks 301, 303, and 305 are performed for each criterion of the entry, control flows to block 321. Operations indicated at blocks 321, 323, 325, and 327 are performed for each entry in the event table.

At block 321, it is determined if all criteria of the entry are satisfied. If all criteria of the entry are satisfied, then control flows to block 323. If not, then control flows to block 215 for the next entry, if any.

At block 323, a device(s) that performs an operation(s) that implements the event(s) indicated in the entry is determined. For instance, an external evaluator determines that operations to implement a celebration event are performed by an audio controller and a LED display. As another example, the external evaluator determines a network address of a server that implements order submission and account debiting operations to implement a hospitality event.

At block 325, a communication(s) that indicates the operation(s) is generated. The communication is for the device(s) determined to perform the operation(s). As examples, an external evaluator can construct a message with operation codes or name of procedures or functions to be executed by the device(s). An external evaluator can also call a function or procedure that populates a template message with operation codes or API calls, and a network address of the device(s) that will use the operation codes or make the API calls.

At block 327, the communication is transmitted to the device(s). An external evaluator can transmit the communication as a network packet, in an e-mail message, incidental to executing an API function, by passing the communication to a process that handles transmission, etc. Control flows from block 327 to block 215 for processing of the next entry, if any.

Returning to FIG. 2, if control flowed from block 203 to block 205, then the event criterion state structure is updated with the wagering game outcome data.

At block 207, a loop begins for each entry in an event table that corresponds to the structure. For instance, the criterion state structure can indicate an index or reference to the entry in the event table.

At block 209, a loop begins for each previously unsatisfied criterion of the entry. For instance, an external evaluator examines the criterion state structure to determine unsatisfied criteria. From block 209, control flows to block 301 of FIG. 3. Control from block 303 or block 305 flows back to block 209, if there is another unsatisfied criterion.

After the loop initiated at block 209, control flows to block 321 of FIG. 3. Control flows from block 321 or block 327 back to block 207 if there is another entry that corresponds to the criterion state structure.

In addition to the examples already provided, an external evaluator allows for overloaded symbols, a portal progressive, independent auditing, etc. To illustrate overloaded symbols and a portal progressive game, a same combination of symbols can have different results for different games. Assume three cherries results in a reward 2× the wager for a base wagering game, and results in a non-monetary virtual economy type reward in a portal progressive game (e.g., the three cherries index into a different paytable accessible to the external evaluator). The external evaluator or a machine that handles the portal progressive game can then communicate the result (e.g., the virtual economy reward) to the electronic wagering game machine that hosts the base wagering game in a portal instantiated on the electronic wagering game machine. The external evaluator can also be used to independent audit electronic wagering game machines. For instance, an external evaluator can host a shadow paytable for a wagering game. An electronic wagering game machine can report wagering game outcome data to the external evaluator and a separate independent machine, for example a game server. The game server can determine a reward based on the outcome data. Likewise, the external evaluator can determine a reward with the outcome data and the shadow paytable. The electronic wagering game machine can be audited by comparing the rewards computed by the game server and the external evaluator. As another example, the wagering game machine can communicate wagering game outcome data with awards to a backend machine that maintains an auditing log of the wagering game outcome data with awards (e.g., hourly, daily, after each outcome or event, etc.). The wagering game machine can also report the wagering game outcome data to an external evaluator that determines events/awards with a shadow paytable. The external evaluator can then communicate the events/awards determined with the shadow paytable associated with an identifier of the wagering game machine to the backend machine, which will maintains an auditing log for the external evaluator. The backend machine can compare auditing logs of the wagering game machines to the auditing logs of the external evaluator to independently and securely audit wagering game machines.

Embodiments are not limited to evaluating wagering game outcome data from individual machines. Embodiments can evaluate wagering game outcome data from multiple wagering game machines, and an event can be triggered based on an aggregate of wagering game outcome data satisfying event criteria or event criteria being satisfied by wagering game outcome data from different wagering game machines.

FIG. 5 depicts an example conceptual diagram normalizing of aggregated wagering game outcome data by an external evaluator. A wagering game establishment system comprises wagering game machines 503, 507, an external evaluator 509, and a device 511 (e.g., display controller, portal progressive game controller, etc.). A player 501 plays at the wagering game machine 503 and a player 505 plays at the wagering game machine 507.

At stages A1 and A2, the wagering game machine 503 and the wagering game machine 507 respectively communicate wagering game outcome data to the external evaluator.

At stage B, the external evaluator 509 processes the wagering game outcome data from the wagering game machine 503, 507. The external evaluator 509 aggregates and evaluates the wagering game outcome data from the wagering game machine 503, 507. Examples of aggregating the wagering game outcome data include summing wager amounts, combining symbols, matching symbols across players, etc. The external evaluator 509 evaluates the aggregated wagering game outcome data against event criteria until an aggregate of the wagering game outcome data satisfies a criterion of an event(s). The external evaluator 509 computes an adjustment to be applied to an award/event resulting from the wagering game outcome data. For instance, the players 501 and 505 may have wagered different wager amounts (e.g., different denominations, a bet and a max bet, etc.). If criteria at the external evaluator are satisfied by the aggregate of the wagering game outcome data from the electronic wagering game machines 503, 507, then an event/award arising from satisfaction of the criteria can be adjusted based on the differences in the wager amounts. For instance, if an environmental effect results, then it can be scaled in volume and number of lighting displays involved for the player who wagered a greater amount. As another example, if a coupon for a dinner is the award, then the coupon can be increased based on the ratio of the wagered amounts. Embodiments are not limited to basing adjustments on wager amounts. Embodiments can adjust based on awards of a base wagering game. For example, the player 501 may have a greater reward at the machine 503 than the player 505 at the machine 507 regardless of amount wagered. A bigger celebration event (e.g., replicated across more displays and sounds systems) can be performed for the player who wins more. In addition, embodiments may adjust the wagering game outcome data before aggregating or before evaluating against event criteria. For instance, the external evaluator 509 can normalize the symbols of the different wagering games before evaluating against criteria for an event. The external evaluator 509 can translate or map the symbols of Game A on the wagering game machine 503 to the symbols of Game B on the wagering game machine 507. The external evaluator 509 can also translate or map the symbols of Game A and Game B to a set of universal symbols known to the external evaluator 509, symbols of a Game C known to the external evaluator 509, etc. In addition, embodiments can separately evaluate aggregated wagering game outcome data, individual wagering game outcome data, and normalized wagering game outcome data. Assuming criteria for an event are satisfied, the external evaluator 509 determines a wagering game server that performs an operation(s) that implements the event. For example, a wagering game server can maintain state of a treasure hunt or puzzle game. As an illustration, if at least one of two players hit a particular combination of symbols, then the team of players is awarded a puzzle piece for a puzzle, which when completed results in an award to the team.

At stage C, the external evaluator 509 communicates an indication of the normalized wagering game outcome data and/or the operation(s) to the device 511.

At stage D, the device 511 causes the operation(s) to be performed. For instance, a puzzle for the team of players 501 and 505 is updated to reflect award of a new piece. And the device 511 then determines if the puzzle has been completed.

FIGS. 6-7 depict flowcharts of example operations for evaluating wagering game outcome data from multiple wagering game machines. The operations depicted in FIG. 6 are similar to the operations depicted in FIG. 2. At block 601, wagering game outcome data is received from a wagering game machine.

At block 603, it is determined if there is an event criterion state structure that corresponds to the wagering game machine. For instance, an external evaluator accesses a table to determine if an event criterion state structure has been instantiated for the wagering game machine that generated the received wagering game outcome data. Events can have criteria satisfied in one instance and can have criteria that can be satisfied over time with multiple outcomes. The event criterion state structure tracks state of satisfaction of event criteria (e.g., a first criterion has been satisfied, but a second has not been satisfied) on a wagering game machine basis. In the case of wagering game outcome data aggregation, a root node can be created with a reference to a different state structure for each wagering game machine. Embodiments can also create a criterion state structure with records, fields, or entries for each wagering game machine. In addition, the event criterion state structure can indicate relevant wagering game machines and compact or aggregate the outcome data (e.g., wager amounts, awards, symbols, etc.) into fields shared across wagering game machines. Embodiments can also create a first structure that identifies members of a group of wagering game machines, and then create a criterion state structure identified by a group identifier, group name, and/or reference from the group structure. If an event criterion state structure has been instantiated for the wagering game machine, then control flows to block 605. Otherwise, control flows to block 611.

At block 611, it is determined if the wagering game outcome data corresponds to an entry in an event table. For instance, the external evaluator can determine if the wagering game outcome data indicates a game type (e.g., video poker, video slot, etc.) that indexes or keys an entry in the event table. Although the illustration refers to a table, embodiments are not limited to a table structure and can utilize any of a variety of data structures and hardware to associate an event with a criterion or criteria. In addition, multiple events can index into or be associated with a same set of rules and/or criteria. If the wagering game outcome data corresponds to an entry in the event table, then control flows to block 613. If not, then control flows to block 612.

At block 612, the wagering outcome data is discarded. Embodiments are not, however, required to discard the wagering game outcome data. Embodiments can use the wagering game outcome data to update logs, track outcomes, compute statistics, etc.

At block 613, a loop begins for each entry in the event table that corresponds to the wagering game outcome data.

At block 615, a criterion state structure is generated that indicates the wagering game machine.

At block 617, the criterion state structure is populated with wagering game outcome data that is relevant to the corresponding entry. Embodiments can populate the structure with a reference to the wagering game outcome data, a reference to a portion of the wagering game outcome data, etc. Embodiments can generate the criterion state structure based on all criteria for an entry, for example, by calling a function aware of the criteria. Embodiments can also create an initial criterion state structure with a record or field for the first encountered criterion, and update the structure as more criterion are encountered. Embodiments can also create the criterion state structure with an index or reference into the corresponding entry of the event table.

At block 617, a nested loop begins for each criterion of the entry. Control flows from block 617 to block 301 of FIG. 3. From either block 303 or block 305, control returns to block 619 for the next criterion of the entry, if any.

After the criteria of the current entry have been evaluated, control flows to block 701 of FIG. 7.

At block 701, it is determined if the wagering game outcome data is to be normalized. For instance, a game identifier may be used to select a table that maps symbols indicated in the wagering game outcome data to a different set of symbols. If the wagering game outcome data is to be normalized, then control flows to block 705. Otherwise, control flows to block 703.

At block 705, the wagering game outcome data is normalized acros. Embodiments can also compute an adjustment for an award or awards. Control flows from block 705 to block 703.

At block 703, it is determined if all of the criteria of the corresponding entry are satisfied. If so, then control flows to block 707. Otherwise, control flows to block 613 for the next corresponding entry, if any.

At block 707, a device(s) that performs an operation(s) that implements the event(s) indicated in the entry is determined. For instance, an external evaluator determines that operations to implement a celebration event are performed by an audio controller and a LED display. As another example, the external evaluator determines a network address of a server that implements order submission and account debiting operations to implement a hospitality event.

At block 709, a communication(s) that indicates the operation(s) and the normalized data is generated. The communication is for the device(s) determined to perform the operation(s). As examples, an external evaluator can construct a message with operation codes or name of procedures or functions to be executed by the device(s). An external evaluator can also call a function or procedure that populates a template message with operation codes or API calls, and a network address of the device(s) that will use the operation codes or make the API calls.

At block 711, the communication is transmitted to the device(s). An external evaluator can transmit the communication as a network packet, in an e-mail message, incidental to executing an API function, by passing the communication to a process that handles transmission, etc. Control flows from block 711 to block 613 for the next corresponding entry, if any.

If control flowed to block 605 from block 603, then the criterion state structure that corresponds to the wagering game machine is updated with the wagering game outcome data at block 605.

At block 607, a loop begins for each entry in an event table that corresponds to the criterion state structure.

At block 609, a nested loop begins for each previously unsatisfied criterion of the entry that corresponds to the event criterion state structure. From block 609, control flows to block 301 of FIG. 3. From either block 303 or block 305, control returns to block 609 for the next previously unsatisfied criterion of the entry, if any.

After the criteria of the current corresponding entry have been inspected, control flows to block 701 of FIG. 7. Control returns from block 701 or block 711 to block 607 for a next corresponding entry, if any.

In embodiments, the operations for external evaluation functionality can be performed by executing instructions residing on machine-readable media (e.g., software), while in other embodiments, the operations can be performed by hardware and/or other logic (e.g., firmware). In addition, the flowcharts depicted above should not be used to limit embodiments. Various ones of the operations depicted in the flowcharts can be performed in series, in parallel, in a different order, etc. In addition, embodiments can perform less than all the operations shown in any flow diagram or additional operations not shown in any flow diagram. Examples of additional operations include retrieving additional data, subsequent exchanges between the external evaluator and a device implementing operations for an event, etc. To illustrate, assume a team of players have hit all symbols in their separate base wagering games to win awards in a portal bonus game that awards beverages. But only players who have been platinum for more than a year are eligible for the award. The external evaluator can perform operations to retrieve additional data about the players from their player accounts to determine their eligibility. After the external evaluator determines those players on the winning team who are eligible for the award, the external evaluator and/or another device can perform a second set of operations to determine drink preferences of the eligible winning members of the team. The external evaluator can use their player account data to determine their drink preferences. The external evaluator or another device can also prompt the team members for drink preference information (e.g., prompt because no preference was designated in their player account, prompt for confirmation of the preference, etc.). After determining the drink preferences of the eligible winning players, the external evaluator can then communicate the preferences to a device that handles hospitality services and/or the device managing the bonus portal game.

External Evaluator Architectures

FIG. 8 is a block diagram illustrating an example external evaluator architecture. As shown in FIG. 8, the wagering game machine architecture 800 includes a wagering game machine 806, which includes a central processing unit (CPU) 826 connected to main memory 828. The CPU 826 can include any suitable processor, such as an Intel® Pentium processor, Intel® Core 2 Duo processor, AMD Opteron™ processor, or UltraSPARC processor. The main memory 828 encodes an evaluation unit 836 that causes the CPU 826 to perform functionality for evaluating wagering game outcome data against event criteria as described above.

The CPU 826 is also connected to an input/output (I/O) bus 822, which can include any suitable bus technologies, such as an AGTL+ frontside bus and a PCI backside bus. The I/O bus 822 is connected to a primary display 810, secondary display 812, value input device 814, information reader 818, and storage unit 830. The I/O bus 822 is also connected to an external system interface 824, which is connected to external systems 804 (e.g., wagering game networks).

In one embodiment, the wagering game machine 806 can include additional peripheral devices and/or more than one of each component shown in FIG. 8. For example, in one embodiment, the wagering game machine 806 can include multiple external system interfaces 824 and/or multiple CPUs 826. In one embodiment, any of the components can be integrated or subdivided.

Any component of the architecture 800 can include hardware, firmware, and/or machine-readable media including instructions for performing the operations described herein. Machine-readable media includes any mechanism that provides (i.e., stores and/or transmits) information in a form readable by a machine (e.g., a wagering game machine, computer, etc.). For example, tangible machine-readable media includes read only memory (ROM), random access memory (RAM), magnetic disk storage media, optical storage media, flash memory machines, etc. Machine-readable media also includes any media suitable for transmitting software over a network.

While FIG. 8 describes an example external evaluator architecture, this section continues with a discussion wagering game networks.

Wagering Game Networks

FIG. 9 is a block diagram illustrating a wagering game network 900, according to example embodiments of the invention. As shown in FIG. 9, the wagering game network 900 includes a plurality of casinos 912 connected to a communications network 914.

Each casino 912 includes a local area network 916, which includes an access point 904, an external evaluator 906, and wagering game machines 902. The access point 904 provides wireless communication links 910 and wired communication links 908. The wired and wireless communication links can employ any suitable connection technology, such as Bluetooth, 802.11, Ethernet, public switched telephone networks, SONET, etc. In embodiments, the external evaluator 906 evaluates wagering game outcome data from the wagering game machines 902 against event criteria. The external evaluator 906 then communicates operations to implement events to other devices in the network (not depicted) (e.g., a bonus game server, an environment controller, etc.).

The wagering game machines 902 described herein can take any suitable form, such as floor standing models, handheld mobile units, bartop models, workstation-type console models, etc. Further, the wagering game machines 902 can be primarily dedicated for use in conducting wagering games, or can include non-dedicated devices, such as mobile phones, personal digital assistants, personal computers, etc. In one embodiment, the wagering game network 900 can include other network devices, such as accounting servers, wide area progressive servers, player tracking servers, and/or other devices suitable for use in connection with embodiments of the invention.

In some embodiments, either the wagering game machines 902 (client) or the external evaluator 906 can provide functionality that is not directly related to game play. For example, account transactions and account rules may be managed centrally (e.g., by the external evaluator 906) or locally (e.g., by the wagering game machine 902). Other functionality not directly related to game play may include power management, presentation of advertising, software or firmware updates, system quality or security checks, etc.

Any of the wagering game network components (e.g., the wagering game machines 902) can include hardware and machine-readable media including instructions for performing the operations described herein.

General

This detailed description refers to specific examples in the drawings and illustrations. These examples are described in sufficient detail to enable those skilled in the art to practice the inventive subject matter. These examples also serve to illustrate how the inventive subject matter can be applied to various purposes or embodiments. Other embodiments are included within the inventive subject matter, as logical, mechanical, electrical, and other changes can be made to the example embodiments described herein. Features of various embodiments described herein, however essential to the example embodiments in which they are incorporated, do not limit the inventive subject matter as a whole, and any reference to the invention, its elements, operation, and application are not limiting as a whole, but serve only to define these example embodiments. This detailed description does not, therefore, limit embodiments of the invention, which are defined only by the appended claims. Each of the embodiments described herein are contemplated as falling within the inventive subject matter, which is set forth in the following claims.

Claims

1. A method comprising:

aggregating data representing a plurality of wagering game outcomes from respective ones of a plurality of wagering game machines;
evaluating an aggregate of the data against a criterion for at least one of an event and an award, wherein the award is independent of pay tables for wagering games of the plurality of wagering game machines;
determining that the plurality of wagering game outcomes in aggregate satisfy the criterion based on said evaluating the aggregate of the data against the criterion;
computing an adjustment to be applied to at least one of the event and the award, wherein the adjustment is based, at least in part, on a difference between a first of the plurality of wagering game outcomes as represented by the data and a second of the plurality of wagering game outcomes as represented by the data; and
indicating at least one of the award and the event for a first of the plurality of wagering game machines that corresponds to the first of the plurality of wagering game outcomes and at least one of an adjusted wagering game outcome and an adjusted event for the second of the plurality of wagering game machines that corresponds to the second of the plurality of wagering game outcomes.

2. The method of claim 1 further comprising normalizing the plurality of wagering game outcomes based, at least in part, on at least one of different wager amounts and different types of wagering games.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein said computing the adjustment to be applied to at least one of the event and the award comprises at least one of computing a change in volume for an environmental effect, computing a change in number of lights for an environmental effect, computing a change in value of a hospitality award, and computing a change in value of a virtual economy award.

4. A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium having instructions stored therein, which are executable by a set of one or more processors, the instructions comprising program instructions to:

aggregate data representing a plurality of wagering game outcomes from respective ones of a plurality of wagering game machines;
evaluate an aggregate of the data against a criterion for at least one of an event and an award, wherein the award is independent of pay tables for wagering games of the plurality of wagering game machines;
determine that the plurality of wagering game outcomes in aggregate satisfy the criterion based on evaluation of the aggregate of the data against the criterion;
compute an adjustment to be applied to at least one of the event and the award, wherein the adjustment is based, at least in part, on a difference between a first of the plurality of wagering game outcomes as represented by the data and a second of the plurality of wagering game outcomes as represented by the data; and
indicate at least one of the award and the event for a first of the plurality of wagering game machines that corresponds to the first of the plurality of wagering game outcomes and at least one of an adjusted wagering game outcome and an adjusted event for the second of the plurality of wagering game machines that corresponds to the second of the plurality of wagering game outcomes.

5. The non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 4 further comprising program instructions encoded therein to normalize the plurality of wagering game outcomes based, at least in part, on at least one of different wager amounts and different types of wagering games.

6. The non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 4, wherein the program instructions to compute the adjustment to be applied to at least one of the event and the award comprises program instructions to, at least one of, compute a change in volume for an environmental effect, compute a change in number of lights for an environmental effect, compute a change in value of a hospitality award, and compute a change in value of a virtual economy award.

7. An apparatus comprising:

a processor;
a network interface; and
a machine-readable storage medium having program instruction stored therein, the program instructions executable by a processor to cause the apparatus to,
aggregate data representing a plurality of wagering game outcomes from respective ones of a plurality of wagering game machines;
evaluate an aggregate of the data against a criterion for at least one of an event and an award, wherein the award is independent of pay tables for wagering games of the plurality of wagering game machines;
determine that the plurality of wagering game outcomes in aggregate satisfy the criterion based on evaluation of the aggregate of the data against the criterion;
compute an adjustment to be applied to at least one of the event and the award, wherein the adjustment is based, at least in part, on a difference between a first of the plurality of wagering game outcomes as represented by the data and a second of the plurality of wagering game outcomes as represented by the data; and
indicate at least one of the award and the event for a first of the plurality of wagering game machines that corresponds to the first of the plurality of wagering game outcomes and at least one of an adjusted wagering game outcome and an adjusted event for the second of the plurality of wagering game machines that corresponds to the second of the plurality of wagering game outcomes.

8. The apparatus of claim 7, wherein the machine-readable medium further comprises program instructions encoded therein to normalize the plurality of wagering game outcomes based, at least in part, on at least one of different wager amounts and different types of wagering games.

9. The apparatus of claim 7, wherein the program instructions to compute the adjustment to be applied to at least one of the event and the award comprises program instructions to, at least one of, compute a change in volume for an environmental effect, compute a change in number of lights for an environmental effect, compute a change in value of a hospitality award, and compute a change in value of a virtual economy award.

Referenced Cited
U.S. Patent Documents
5224706 July 6, 1993 Bridgeman et al.
5541981 July 30, 1996 Lynn
7153211 December 26, 2006 Campaigne
8262445 September 11, 2012 Spigner
20030003990 January 2, 2003 Von Kohorn
20030109306 June 12, 2003 Karmarkar
20040204226 October 14, 2004 Foster et al.
20040204229 October 14, 2004 Walker et al.
20050070356 March 31, 2005 Mothwurf et al.
20050176494 August 11, 2005 Thomas
20060058099 March 16, 2006 Soukup et al.
20060063580 March 23, 2006 Nguyen et al.
20060100019 May 11, 2006 Hornik et al.
20060111170 May 25, 2006 Hornik et al.
20060279044 December 14, 2006 Pacey
20070218974 September 20, 2007 Patel et al.
20080096625 April 24, 2008 Thomas et al.
20090023494 January 22, 2009 Colletti et al.
20090093299 April 9, 2009 Acres
20090124336 May 14, 2009 Lyons et al.
20090124368 May 14, 2009 Lyons et al.
20090131175 May 21, 2009 Kelly et al.
20090149250 June 11, 2009 Middleton
20090181776 July 16, 2009 Deng
20090186699 July 23, 2009 Kelly
20090270157 October 29, 2009 Christensen
20090310027 December 17, 2009 Fleming
20100056248 March 4, 2010 Acres
20100120494 May 13, 2010 Dewaal et al.
20100261521 October 14, 2010 Oatman et al.
20100317424 December 16, 2010 Hornik et al.
20110105218 May 5, 2011 Anderson et al.
Foreign Patent Documents
WO2011044397 April 2011 WO
Other references
  • “PCT Application No. PCT/US10/51875 International Preliminary Report on Patentability”, Nov. 16, 2011 , 4 pages.
  • “PCT Application No. PCT/US10/51875 International Search Report”, Dec. 1, 2010 , 8 pages.
Patent History
Patent number: 8597112
Type: Grant
Filed: Oct 7, 2010
Date of Patent: Dec 3, 2013
Patent Publication Number: 20120115592
Assignee: WMS Gaming, Inc (Waukegan, IL)
Inventors: Mark B. Gagner (West Chicago, IL), Jacek A. Grabiec (Chicago, IL), Timothy T. Gronkowski (Chicago, IL), Damon E. Gura (Chicago, IL), Budyanto Himawan (Schaumburg, IL)
Primary Examiner: Paul A D'Agostino
Application Number: 13/384,067
Classifications
Current U.S. Class: Credit/debit Monitoring Or Manipulation (e.g., Game Entry, Betting, Prize Level, Etc.) (463/25); Lot-to-lot Combination (e.g., Slot Machine, Etc.) (463/20)
International Classification: A63F 9/24 (20060101); A63F 13/00 (20060101);